“Most of the anthropomorphists (mujassima) were literalists; followers of the apparent (dhahir) of the Book and Sunnah, and most of these (mujassima) were Muhaddithin. And ibn Taymiyya and his companions had a great inclination to establish direction (for Allah) and exaggerated in attacking those who negated it (direction)…”

Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (D. 756AH) on ibn Taymiyya and his followers being from the deviant Hashwiyya sect, and that they were a minority fringe group who would teach their beliefs in secret

“As for the Hashwiyya, they are a despicable and ignorant lot who claim to belong to the school of (Imam) Ahmad (ibn Hanbal)… They have corrupted the creed of a few isolated Shafi’is, especially some of the Hadith scholars among them who are lacking in reason… They were held in utmost contempt, and then towards the end of the seventh century (AH) a man appeared who was diligent, intelligent and well-read and did not find a Shaykh to guide him, and he is of their creed and is brazen and dedicated to teaching his ideas… He said that non-eternal attributes can subsist in Allah, and that Allah is ever-acting, and that an infinite chain of events is not impossible either in the past or the future. He split the ranks and cast doubts on the creed of the Muslims and incited dissension amongst them. He did not confine himself to creedal matters of theology, but transgressed the bounds and said that travelling to visit the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is a sin… The scholars agreed to imprison him for a long time, and the Sultan imprisoned him… and he died in prison. Then some of his followers started to promulgate his ideas and teach them to people in secret while keeping quiet in public, and great harm came from this.”

“Our teacher Shaykh al-Islām Maulānā Madanī (rahmatullāhi ‘alaih) was more strict than Hadhrat Shāh ‘Abd al-Azīz (rahmatullāhi ‘alaih) on this matter regarding ibn Taymiyya because he had read the written works of ‘Allāmah (ibn Taymiyya), and he didn’t like the title of ‘Shaykh al-Islām’ being used for ‘Allāmah ibn Taymiyya. This is why he showed severe dislike towards the usage of ‘Shaykh al-Islām’ for ibn Taymiyya by Shaykh al-Hadīth Maulānā Muhammad Zakariyyā Sāhib (rahmatullāhi ‘alaih) in ‘Badhlul Majhūd’ (mistake of the scribe; correction – should be – ‘Awjāz al-Masālik’), and Hadhrat ([Husain Ahmad Madanī -] rahmatullāhi ‘alaih)’s book al-Shihāb al-Thāqib is an incomparable awesome book in terms of ‘ilm [knowledge] and tahqīq [research/verification] regarding the establishing of truth and vanquishing of falsehood – may Allāh shower him with mercy in abundance.”

‘During the Bukhārī and Tirmidhī lectures at Dar al-‘Ulūm Deoband he would strongly refute Hafiz ibn Taymiyya’s lone opinions on ‘aqā-id and masā-il. He also said, “While I was residing in Madīnah al-Munawwarah I read his books and literature, some are such that you would be lucky to find it in a bookshop in India. After studying all these books, I have come to the conclusion through wisdom and foresight that there is a blatant turn away found in him from the way of ahl al-sunnah wa al-jamā’ah”.’

“It is proper to entreat and ask for the help and intercession of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) with Allah. No one from amongst the salaf and the khalaf denied this, until ibn Taymiyya came along and disapproved of this, and deviated from the straight path, and invented a position that no scholar has said before, and he became a deterrent example for Muslims”

“It is good to make intercession with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) to his Lord. No one from the first generations (salaf), or those who followed (khalaf), repudiated this until Ibn Taymiyyah arrived. He repudiated intercession, went out from the straight path and innovated what no scholar before him had said, and became known for that among the people of Islam.”

“Mawlana ‘Abd al-Hayy al-Lucknawi (D. 1304AH), the great ‘alim from India and the author of hundreds of invaluable books known to the world, said in his book Ghais al-Ghamam, ‘Like the predecessor ibn Taymiyya al-Harrani, the successor al-Shawkani (D. 1250AH) was very learned but was less intelligent. The latter was exactly alike, even more inferior than the former.’”

[Shaykh Muhammad Ziyaullah from Siyalkut, Pakistan, in his work The Truth of Wahhabism]

The prominent Maghribi-born Medinan-based scholar, Imam Muhammad ibn al-Tayyib al-Fasi (D. 1170AH); one of the teachers of the famous scholar and lexicographer Imam Muhammad Murtada al-Zabidi (d. 1205AH); in his commentary on the popular litany (hizb) of Imam al-Nawawi (D. 676AH), went on to briefly consider and reject ibn Taymiyya’s position on the popular expressions of piety such as litanies (awrad and ahzab) while quoting Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-din al-Subki (D. 756AH) and Imam Ahmad Zarruq al-Burnusi (D. 899AH) on ibn Taymiyya:

“Ibn Taymiyya criticised ahzab and rejected them in a most inappropriate manner, and went to extremes in undermining it. They have responded to him, and gone to extremes in criticising him, and have stated that his abilities are conceded as far as memory is concerned, but that he is unreliable in matters of dogma, and that he is deficient in reason, let alone mystical gnosis (‘irfan). Some have even gone to the extent of attributing to him not only heresy (zandaqa) but unbelief. The Imam of Imams, Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756AH) was asked about him and said: He is a man whose knowledge is greater than his reason. Shaykh [Ahmad] Zarruq [al-Burnusi (d. 899AH)] has said: The upshot of this is that consideration is given to items of knowledge that he relates, but not to his handling of this knowledge. Hence no heed is given to his rejection, and no consideration given to his analysis and judgement. And Allah knows best.”